By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
spemanig said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

Netflix peacefully co-exists with movie studios and network TV.  It mostly got it's market from DVD sales and cable TV.  This is important, because Netflix did not attack content creation at it's source.  On the other hand Spotify crippled the Music industry.  Given the Music industry already took a few blows from other content sources before Spotify came along: Napster, iTunes, Pandora, etc....  But the crippling blow came from Spotify and the Music industry has never recovered.  Annual revenue is now just a fraction of what it was during the 20th century.  The quantity and quality of new music has measurably decreased.

This is demonstrably untrue. Objectively, the quantity of new music has increased exponentially. Subjectively, the advent of new electronic technologies, increased discoverability and sustainability of niche projects, and the overall evaporation of genres as a direct result of more young artists listening to more different things has made for far more complex, experimental, and eclectic sounds in music on a grand and microcosmic scale then has ever been seen before in literally any other time in human history. Someone would need to be literally listening to music with their head in the sand not to at least see and appreciate that. Maybe with so many more options, it's more difficult to discover music that appeals to more specific tastes, but at the same time, it's so much easier to actually find more music that fits those tastes once you do.

I'm not saying that this has any baring on what will happen with games as a result of streaming becoming mainstream, but also that's exactly what I'm saying. Jk, not at all. But am I, really? No. Yes?

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/is-pop-music-evolving-or-is-it-just-getting-louder/

KBG29 said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

My initial thoughts:

1.  The technology is extremely impressive.  There are two other factors that are even more important than technology though: game library and business model (discussed below).  Still, the tech is extremely impressive.  It could be a game changer depending on how the other two things play out.

2.  Game library is the most important thing.  They did announce that they have a first party development studio.  That at least shows they know a little bit about the gaming business.  However if you look at what territories they plan to launch it is basically North America and most of Europe.  To me it says that they currently have Western studios as most of their partners and have few Japanese partners.  Already it seems like their game library will be weak, but admittedly I am going off of little information here.

3.  Business model is the second most important thing and it has a unique roll given the new approach Google is taking.  I mean their business model could be terrible like the Ouya's business model and that will sink the platform.  But that is not even the worst case scenario.  The worst case scenario is that their platform becomes dominant but their business model kills off the gaming industry.  There is a big difference between being the "Netflix of gaming" and being the "Spotify of gaming". 

Netflix peacefully co-exists with movie studios and network TV.  It mostly got it's market from DVD sales and cable TV.  This is important, because Netflix did not attack content creation at it's source.  On the other hand Spotify crippled the Music industry.  Given the Music industry already took a few blows from other content sources before Spotify came along: Napster, iTunes, Pandora, etc....  But the crippling blow came from Spotify and the Music industry has never recovered.  Annual revenue is now just a fraction of what it was during the 20th century.  The quantity and quality of new music has measurably decreased.

So, basically what I am saying is: the business model matters a lot.  I would prefer that they have an account system like iTunes, where you actually buy and own your games.  That is a healthy, sustainable system.  The worst system they could use is one based entirely on ad revenue.  That is how Youtube works and Google does not make profits from Youtube and the vast majority of their content is made by amateurs on top of that.  Microtransactions...well if they go this route, they may find they attract a different type of gamer than the typical Sony/Nintendo/Microsoft gamer.  Business model can seriously affect how this whole thing turns out.

Final thought: the technology is very impressive but it is too early to tell how things will play out at this point.

I agree with you about the business model. How they allow access to this service is going to be important. I would love to see multiple options that fit all cases, just as the service is built to fit all needs.

I would like to see them offer a free ad based tier, a paid subscription tier, rental options, and full purchase. Let people choose. This gives access to everyone, and that is what it should be all about.

As far as library goes, I actually don't think library is that important. This is not a device you are buying into that you have to justify purchasing. This is a service that will be available on all the devices we already have, we can even use the Gamepads we already own. Even if you have no interest in 3rd party titles on the platform, you will be able to access Stadia exclusives with zero investment.

This is a good point.  I could see them offering different pricing models based on the games.  For example, they could offer Android games based on ads/microtransactions, because that is how those games are already priced.  But with Stadia I can now play Angry Birds or some other mobile game on my TV. 

The latest Call of Duty still needs to have a $ price to it though.  Either that or they offer old AAA games on a subscription similar to how Netflix offers old AAA movies on a subscription.  Basically I think they need to choose between either a pricetag (with account) or a subscription model for AAA games.  They can use an iTunes model or they can use a Spotify model, but I don't think they can use both at the same time.  

Also I very much believe game library still matters, even if I don't have to buy a console.  I own a PC, and I never play on Steam.  First, I hate the service, so their is that.  But if they had an exclusive that I really, really wanted to play, then I would actually use them.  As much as I hate Steam, games are still the most important thing.  I really do not like gaming on a 3" screen, but I bought a Gameboy Advance, because it had games I wanted to play.  All of this applies to Stadia.  The most important thing in gaming is the games.  If it has great games, especially exclusives, then the platform will succeed.  Period.  If the platform lacks good games, then it will fail.  Period.  Successful platforms always have great games that lots of people want to play.